EW volume comparison between MiTS 1 and MiTS 2

Objective: Comparison of Earthwork volume between MiTS 1 and MiTS 2

There are few parameters that we will keep constant to reduce the discrepancy between each project file. The parameters are listed as follow:

1. Using TIN as meshing method
2. Grid size
   • Angle: 0
   • Interval: 5m
   • Left offset: 2.5m
   • Right offset: 2.5m
3. End-Area
   • Interval: 5m

With slope #

Swell/Shrink Factor: 1.00
You can refer to the MiTS 1 project file here.
You can refer to the MiTS 2 project file here.

Method	MiTS 1	MiTS 2	Discrepancy
DTM	476638.77	474631.90	0.42%
Grid	362866.72	476171.18	27.01%
End-Area	476771.49	474752.40	0.42%

Without slope #

Swell/Shrink Factor: 1.00
You can refer to the MiTS 1 project file here.
You can refer to the MiTS 2 project file here.

Method	MiTS 1	MiTS 2	Discrepancy
DTM	358365.46	358366.66	0.00%
Grid	362866.72	360416.96	0.68%
End-Area	357810.16	357811.73	0.00%

With shrink/swell factor (with slope) #

Swell/Shrink Factor: 0.70
You can refer to the MiTS 1 project file here.
You can refer to the MiTS 2 project file here.

Method	MiTS 1	MiTS 2	Discrepancy
DTM	273396.60	271994.63	0.51%
Grid	218282.41	274146.18	22.69%
End-Area	273547.74	272132.50	0.52%

Note: You can refer here to know the detailed earthwork computation for a project with shrink/swell factor.

Conclusion #

In conclusion, for DEM and End-Area Method, the results obtained from MiTS 1 and MiTS 2 typically show a little discrepancy of less than 1%, which can be attributed to algorithmic improvements made in MiTS 2. Whereas for Grid Method, there are significant differences between the results obtained in MiTS 1 and MiTS 2. This happens because one limitation of the Grid Method used in MiTS 1 is that it does not account for the effects of slope, resulting in identical EW volumes regardless of slope information. However, this limitation has been fixed and improved in MiTS 2.